#1
|
|||
|
|||
204 Wildcat?
Has any one thought about necking the 204 ruger up to 6mm or .25? I am thinking of a longer TCU for contender round for varmint and light big game.
Thanks Brett |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Ya, it's called the 6X47. It was an old BR cal from before the PPC. 222mag is the parent case just like the 204. The shoulder is not the same angle as the 204 you have in mind but would probably make little difference. There is not much shoulder left once it is sized up to .243
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I've necked the 204 up to 22, 25 and the 6mm barrel should be here next week. The 25 will duplicate the 250 Savage factory loads and is a great deer round 75's-3200fps, 85's-3000fps and 100's at 2800fps, 22" barrel, it is very close to the 257 Kimber but no fireforming required. The 22-204 is very close to the 223AI and about 100fps faster than the 222Rem Mag. my rifle is running 40's at 3900fps and 50's at 3700fps, 22" barrel. The 6mm I hope to get 3600fps from the 55's and 3400 from 62's. All of these are a straight neck up with no fireforming, great little round.
AWS |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A 250 Savage holds a lot more powder than a 204 case, you must run a lot more pressure to equal it. Larry
__________________
A gun is just like a parachute, if you really need one, nothing else will do. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Yes the pressure is higher but remember factory loads in the 250 are at fairly low presure for the old 99's if you load a 250 to modern pressure you will pick up around 200fps over factory loads. That said 250 factory ballistics have a proven history of harvesting venison.
AWS |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sometimes it is a matter of efficiency and a faster powder for the smaller case. My 250 AI will exceed the velocity of a standard 257 Roberts at modern pressures and a 257 Roberts AI will exceed the velocity of a 25-06, bullet weight for bullet weight except for the really heavy custom bullet weights...i.e. 125 and over, but even then it will usually equal the velocity. Using the 204/222RM case makes it even more efficient up to a certain point as far as bullet weight and caliber goes.
Were talking about a small difference in case capacity and a large diffference in actual, chronographed performance. We also have to consider a larger case needs more powder of the correct burning rate to equal the smaller cases velocity and even more powder to exceed it...basic simple physics...always argumentative and exceptions can always be found, but generally speaking the basic premise still holds. I think you get into that fine line between fact and fiction when playing with wildcats and even though I've done it for a very long time and still do it, I'm not convinced there is any real ecomonic savings overall considering the cost of custom reamers and dies, and my recommendation to those contemplating getting into wildcatting...is DON'T...if you are thinking about economics, there isn't any savings and usually cost much more than just going with standards for all the obvious reasons...but if you like to experiment, jump in with both feet and forget the water wings, drowning is the only alternative. One thing is for certain, almost every cartridge available since metalic cartridges were invented, has been modified in numerous ways and for all intents and purposes there is nothing new under the sun. Just as soon as one "new" cartridge has hit the market someone has already thought up or redesigned it either up or down in caliber size. And, even the "new" cartridges...the RSUM, WSM, and RUM are nothing more than the "old" 404 Jeffery dressed up in a new suit of clothes. Not that there is anything basically right or wrong about exersizing your mind by thinking up new and different ways to "Be Green" in todays parlance and "recycle". And Yes, AWS, the 222 and 222 RM, and 223 and the AI versions have always been excellent cases to "fondle" and the 6mm/25/6.5/7mm versions started a lot of ruckus's when they first appeared and spent their times in the winners circle, but bigger is always better and the BR and PPC run'um out of town, so to speak and sad to say. Several generations of shooters missed out on some very fine shooters, and it's nice to see them getting reserected even if only for a few. 'Njoy |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
25-204
AWS who is doing your gunsmithing for the 204 necked up to 25? Do you use a new reamer or a 204 reamer with a 257 pilot?
Thanks Brett |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Pac-Nor did the 25-204 barrel, they cut the chamber with a 204 reamer and cut the neck and throat for the dummy cartridges I sent.
For the 6mm-204 I had PTG make me a reamer and rchamberred a 223 barrel I had and the 6mm-204 will be rechamberred from 6x47mm with the 22-204 reamer with a 6mm pilot on it. AWS |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Not to hijack the thread or get way out in right field, but here are some examples of "efficiency" and why the smaller cases seem to be able to get those "out of proportion" velocities.
I did this study because I have a "wildcat" in mind to do, but probably won't now that I have some numbers and a comparison to use. I wanted to shoot heavy for caliber bullets in a quick twist 20 cal barrel for long range varmints that would perform as well or better than a 22 cal of the same platform. I can get those "ultimate" velocities but at a heavy price in powder amounts. Basic parameters are 52 KPSI or less, 26" bbl, high BC, best powder for the best pressure/velocity range compared to my 22-243 Midd(50 gr) and the 204 Ruger(32 gr) and other cases of similar capacity, 20-250 AI and 22-250 AI and any smaller caliber built on the 243 case ...roughly 50 gr H2O. Bullet BC is as close as I could come to the 50 gr Berger for the 22 cal. My basic reason was to see the difference in powder AMOUNTS between the different cases. 204 Ruger/50 gr Berger/2.5" COAL/25 gr Varget/3600 f/s at 52Kpsi 20-243/50 gr Berger/2.70" COAL/41 gr H4831/3600 f/s at 41 Kpsi 20-243/50 gr Berger/2.70" COAL/46 gr H4831/4000 f/s at 52Kpsi 22-243/62 gr Berger/2.65" COAL/45 gr H4831/3800 f/s at 52Kpsi I takes 16 gr more powder, 40%, in the 243 case just to equal the 204 Ruger velocity and it takes 20 grains more powder, 45%, to get the highest velocity in the 243 case. The 243 case is 36% larger. 400 f/s isn't any thing to turn your nose up at tho', as far as energy and drop are concerned. Plus the 20 cal bullet has a higher BC weight for weight. To get to the .300 BC range in a 22 cal you need a 62-64 gr bullet. Basically heavier and slower as the 22-243 data indicate. Stick with equal bullet weights and the 20 cal has only a slight advantage in BC. I tried to keep apples to apples here as far as BC's and case capacities were concerned. A similar relationship exists if you step up to a 250 Savage case in the AI iterations over several calibers...very high velocities and a lot less, faster burining powder, compared to the next sized "Standard" cartridge, but there are always trade offs, it only seems to hold with the smaller calibers and certain bullet weights and Murphy always sticks his nose into pie and who wants a piece after that. Now you see why that little 222 RM case does so well when it is necked up and down...efficiency, efficiency, efficiency...and faster burning powders. Clear as a Mississippi Mud pie????? Hahahahahahaha 'Njoy Last edited by NFG; 07-05-2008 at 06:42 PM. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|